Which HD camera? and some other ?'s

	Re: Which HD camera? and some other ?'s by Paul Thurston on Jun 18, 2004 at 1:25:02 am Hi Chris, -Why should it be done in HD? a) HD 24P (23.98 fps) can be easily transferred to NTSC and PAL/SECAM so it ends up looking real good in the various parts of the world. This makes it easier to sell your finished product. For NTSC you run it at 23.98 fps and you get (using 3:2 pulldown) a 29.97 (59.94i) fps sequence. For PAL you run it at 25 fps so it matches perfectly to PAL’s 25fps (50i). For SECAM, well for practical purposes all SECAM is post produced as PAL, so a PAL master is perfect for SECAM countries. b) HD channels have shied away from 16mm or Super16mm for all shows, not just nature. This means they refuse transfers (telecines) to HD made from 16mm film negative. This implies shooting in 35mm or HD. c) HD equipment is easier to use than 35mm as it’s possible to immediately see how the shooting is turning out. Film requires sending the negatives to a lab that may or may not be readily available where you shoot. You can travel lighter when shooting with HD as its tapes last up to 50 minutes (24p mode), so you end up taking less space when packing. Exposed Film roles weigh more than video tapes for equivalent shooting time, may require more packing space, and may increase shipping complexities. d) HD allows for a quick (ENG) type shoot. A Film shoot may require more preparation and setup time since there are more mechanical things that may go wrong (hair in the gate, dust scratches on the negative and film jam if gate is not set up right). HD allows for sync sound, so there’s no need to take a DAT for sound. This makes HD shooting more convenient for post production. e) HD can be edited like video, so post can be quicker. f) HD product transferred to DVD or for internet streaming looks like shot on film without telecine costs involved. Repurposing for stock footage, it’s cheaper to get downconverts from HD than to telecine a sequence to NTSC or PAL and then make a copy to Serial Digital Component tape formats. g) If the final output of the production is broadcast, it’s cheaper and more convenient to shoot in HD. IF final output of the program is theaters, film may still be cheaper or equal in cost. -Format call? You could theoretically shoot everything in 25P since there appears to be more PAL countries than NTSC countries. Just play the edited master as 23.98P to get a 29.97 fps standard definition Digital Component copy. If you shoot and edit at 23.98P, when you playout at 25 fps, for a PAL transfer, the music will be noticeably off pitch (music people will notice it). Since you’re based in California, I would probably shoot all in 23.98P and edit at 23.98P. Then make transfers (with all audio except music track) to NTSC and PAL. Edit music separately, for each of the master tapes (separately for the NTSC compatible Digital Component tape and separately for the PAL compatible Digital Component tape). If a local HD broadcaster refuses your 23.98P master, you may need to do an HD to HD transfer (3:2 pulldown) so that it ends up as 29.97i (59.94i). Whatever frame rate you decide is appropriate for your project, make sure it’s in writing and signed. -Which HD camera? The Sony is setup for 320 ASA (F-10 at 2000 lux) and the Panasonic is F-12 at 2000 lux. You will get better low lighting shooting with the Panasonic VariCam. The Sony camera will give you more definition, 1920 x 1080, than Panasonic’s VariCam 1280 x 720. Higher definition is better for excellent still shots for magazine articles. If you want to do slow mo, the VariCam is the way to go. If not, I would use the Sony HDW-F900. Lens type? Since you will be doing a natural history show, I would use a Canon or Fujinon HD ENG zoom lens (21 - 22x range). These can be really good for travel as they are designed for ENG. The best lenses are the Prime lenses made by Carl Zeiss (Digiprimes) sold/rented by www.bandpro.com. Digiprimes, like all prime lenses, require changing the lens when you want to get closer or farther away from your subject. In wildlife this is problematic as this may allow dust to get into the CCD block when you change the lens. I believe bandpro is making available a Carl Zeiss DigiZoom (6-24mm T1.9) but I’m not sure if it’s available yet. Regardless of the type Sony or Panasonic camera you select, make sure you rent the accuscene viewfinder as it’s revolutionary (makes focusing really easy and it’s in color.) Also a Zeiss Sharp Max or similar portable Back-Focus Alignment device can be a good tool to add to the budget. Both make HD focusing very precise. http://www.accuscene.com/products02.html I think you can find the accuscene viewfinder at bandpro and Panavision. Regards, Paul www.in.mybox.com Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Which by paul thurston on Jun 20, 2004 at 10:37:15 pm Hey Keith, Nice website by the way… Last I heard, National Geographic had communicated it would not accept 16mm material for its HD signal. Only 35mm or HD material would be broadcast. I found this to be strange since, most of the nature material available today appears to be 16mm. The other network, I’m waiting for written confirmation just to make sure things haven’t changed. I was seeing that you have Sony ECM-77’s. I’ve got three Sennheiser MKE2-60’ with the K6 powering modules but found them to be too noisy. I’m thinking of going shopping for something quieter, either omni or unidirectional lavaliere, but haven’t decided yet. What is your experience with your ECM-77’s? Any user info would be appreciated. Regards, Paul Thurston Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index